Real-world treatment patterns and survival outcomes for treated biliary tract cancer patients using administrative databases in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There are limited data available on treatment patterns and outcomes of biliary tract cancers (BTCs) in Canada. The aim of this study was to understand treatment patterns, survival outcomes and healthcare resource use of BTC patients in Ontario, Canada. Methods: We conducted a retrospective population-level study using administrative data of patients diagnosed with advanced or metastatic BTC between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2019. Results: A total of 2,142 BTC patients were identified; 702 (32.8%) with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, 688 (32.1%) with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, 363 (16.9%) with gallbladder cancer, 174 (8.1%) with ampulla of Vater cancer, and 215 (10.0%) with other types of BTC. In total, 1,314 patients (61.3%) were recurrent cases, and 828 (38.7%) were diagnosed with de novo advanced disease. A total of 1,727 patients (80.6%) received first-line systemic treatment of cisplatin plus gemcitabine (75.2%), FOLFOX [5-fluorouracil (5-FU), folinic acid (FA), and oxaliplatin] or FOLFIRI (5-FU, FA, and irinotecan) (11.5%), carboplatin plus gemcitabine (7.6%), or gemcitabine plus taxane (5.7%). Five hundred and twelve patients (29.6%) went on to receive a second-line treatment. Mean and median overall survival from diagnosis was 20.6 and 11.0 months, respectively. Mean and median overall survival from diagnosis was much higher among patients who received a systemic treatment at 23.8 and 14.1 months, respectively compared to 7.0 and 3.3 months, respectively for untreated patients (P<0.0001). Conclusions: Platinum and gemcitabine combinations are the most common first-line treatments. However, only a small proportion of patients go on to receive subsequent treatments. Survival in treated patients is higher than that in untreated patients. Our findings highlight the unmet need for effective systemic therapies for BTC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".